RFC on range design for D2

[Denis Koroskin]

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:46:27 +0400, Extrawurst <spam at extrawurst.org> wrote:

> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> BCS wrote:
>>>> I was referring to the implementation as visible from the called  
>>>> code's side
>>>
>>> opApply isn't going to go away, it will still be there as an  
>>> alternative.
>>  I disagree with that as I think that would be one perfect place to  
>> simplify the language thus fulfilling bearophile's and many others'  
>> wish.
>>  Say we refine ranges to work with foreach to perfection. Then we have:
>>  1. A foreach that sucks
>>  2. A foreach that rocks
>>  The obvious question is, why keep the one that sucks?
>
> I agree but i am worried that wont happen. D gets more and more polluted  
> by deprecated and/or ambiguous stuff:
>
> - inout/ref
>
> - opCall/struct-ctor
>
> are some examples. I whished D would only provide unambiguous features.  
> Especially since D2.0 is the experimental branch anyway, so why not  
> clean up finally ?

I would also add:

invariant float pi1 = 3.1415926;
const float pi2 = 3.1415926;
enum pi3 = 3.1415926;
...